Will automation take away all our jobs? | David Autor

Translator: Joseph Geni Reviewer: Joanna Pietrulewicz

翻译人员: Jiawei Ni 校对人员: Chen Zou

Here's a startling fact:

这里有一个惊人的事实：

in the 45 years since the introduction of the automated teller machine,

自从自动取款机，就是那些

those vending machines that dispense cash,

可以取现金的机器出现的45年来，

the number of human bank tellers employed in the United States

美国银行柜员的数量

has roughly doubled,

大概增加了两倍，

from about a quarter of a million to a half a million.

从约25万增加到了50万。

A quarter of a million in 1970 to about a half a million today,

也就是说1970年的25万 到现在的50万，

with 100,000 added since the year 2000.

其中有10万是2000年以后增加的。

These facts, revealed in a recent book

这些事实，在最近的一本

由波士顿大学经济学家 James Bessen撰写的书中，

by Boston University economist James Bessen,

raise an intriguing question:

引发了一个有趣的问题：

what are all those tellers doing,

这些银行职员都在做什么？

and why hasn't automation eliminated their employment by now?

为什么自动化服务到现在 还没有让他们失业？

If you think about it,

如果你想一下，

many of the great inventions of the last 200 years

过去200年内的许多伟大发明的

were designed to replace human labor.

设计初衷都是替代人力劳动。

Tractors were developed

拖拉机的发明

to substitute mechanical power for human physical toil.

让机械动力替代了人体的劳作。

Assembly lines were engineered

流水线的设计

to replace inconsistent human handiwork

是为了以机器的标准化生产

with machine perfection.

替代手工作业的不稳定性。

Computers were programmed to swap out

编写计算机程序是为了

error-prone, inconsistent human calculation

避免易错且不稳定的人工运算，

with digital perfection.

以实现数字化的精准。

These inventions have worked.

这些发明都奏效了。

We no longer dig ditches by hand,

我们再也不用徒手开挖沟渠，

pound tools out of wrought iron

不用炼铁打铁制造工具，

or do bookkeeping using actual books.

或者用实体账本记账。

And yet, the fraction of US adults employed in the labor market

然而，2016年美国成年人口的

就业比例

is higher now in 2016

与125年前的1890年相比更高了，

than it was 125 years ago, in 1890,

and it's risen in just about every decade

并且这125年间，

in the intervening 125 years.

几乎每10年都有增长。

This poses a paradox.

这就构成了一个矛盾。

Our machines increasingly do our work for us.

机器在为我们负担越来越多的工作。

Why doesn't this make our labor redundant and our skills obsolete?

为什么这没有使得人类 劳动力过剩或者技术被淘汰呢？

为什么还有这么多工作岗位？

Why are there still so many jobs?

(Laughter)

（观众笑声）

I'm going to try to answer that question tonight,

今晚我将尝试回答这个问题，

and along the way, I'm going to tell you what this means for the future of work

同时说明这对就业前景意味着什么，

and the challenges that automation does and does not pose

以及在我们的社会中，自动化带来的挑战

for our society.

和尚未撼动的东西。

Why are there so many jobs?

为什么还有这么多岗位？

There are actually two fundamental economic principles at stake.

这实际上涉及到两个 经济学基本原则。

One has to do with human genius

其中一个有关人类的聪明才智

and creativity.

和创造力。

The other has to do with human insatiability,

另一个有关人类不断求索的天性，

or greed, if you like.

也可以称之为贪婪。

I'm going to call the first of these the O-ring principle,

我把第一个原则称为，O形环原则，

它决定了我们工作的类型。

and it determines the type of work that we do.

The second principle is the never-get-enough principle,

第二个原则叫做“永不满足”原则，

and it determines how many jobs there actually are.

它决定实际存在多少工作岗位。

Let's start with the O-ring.

让我们从O形环原则开始讲。

ATMs, automated teller machines,

ATM，即自动取款机，

had two countervailing effects on bank teller employment.

给银行职员的聘用带来了 两种相反的影响。

As you would expect, they replaced a lot of teller tasks.

The number of tellers per branch fell by about a third.

每家银行的职员数量 减少了大约三分之一。

But banks quickly discovered that it also was cheaper to open new branches,

但很快银行发现， 设置新分行的成本也降低了，

and the number of bank branches increased by about 40 percent

而且在同一时期内，分行的数量

in the same time period.

增长了大约40。

The net result was more branches and more tellers.

净结果就是更多的银行 和更多的职员。

But those tellers were doing somewhat different work.

不过，这些银行职员的 工作内容发生了变化。

As their routine, cash-handling tasks receded,

随着他们常规的现金业务的减少，

they became less like checkout clerks

他们不太像办事员了，

and more like salespeople,

而是更像销售员。

forging relationships with customers,

和客户建立关系，

solving problems

为他们解决问题，

and introducing them to new products like credit cards, loans and investments:

给客户介绍诸如信用卡， 贷款，投资等新的产品：

more tellers doing a more cognitively demanding job.

更多的银行职员从事着 对脑力劳动需求更高的工作。

There's a general principle here.

这里有一个普适的原则。

Most of the work that we do

我们从事的大部分工作

requires a multiplicity of skills,

要求多样化的技能。

and brains and brawn,

既要头脑聪明，又要坚韧不拔，

technical expertise and intuitive mastery,

既要求专业技术，又要求敏锐的直觉，

perspiration and inspiration in the words of Thomas Edison.

用爱迪生的话来说就是 天才加勤奋。

In general, automating some subset of those tasks

总的来说，让其中的一些任务自动化

doesn't make the other ones unnecessary.

不代表其它的内容变的不必要了。

In fact, it makes them more important.

恰恰相反，这使得其它的技能变得更加重要。

It increases their economic value.

它们的经济价值得到了提升。

Let me give you a stark example.

给你们举一个很直接的例子。

In 1986, the space shuttle Challenger

1986年，挑战者号航天飞船

exploded and crashed back down to Earth

在起飞后不到2分钟的时间内

less than two minutes after takeoff.

爆炸并坠落到地面。

The cause of that crash, it turned out,

后来发现事故原因

是助推火箭上的 一个小小的橡胶O形环

was an inexpensive rubber O-ring in the booster rocket

that had frozen on the launchpad the night before

前一晚在发射平台上冻住了，

and failed catastrophically moments after takeoff.

在发射不久后失效并引发了悲剧。

In this multibillion dollar enterprise

在这项耗资几十亿美元的巨大工程中，

that simple rubber O-ring

那个小小的橡胶O形环

made the difference between mission success

决定了发射成功，

and the calamitous death of seven astronauts.

还是导致7位航天员的惨死。

An ingenious metaphor for this tragic setting

对这一悲剧催生的一个巧妙的比喻，

is the O-ring production function,

是O形环生产方程 （O-ring production function），

named by Harvard economist Michael Kremer

由哈佛大学经济学家Michael Kremer

在挑战者号悲剧之后命名。

after the Challenger disaster.

The O-ring production function conceives of the work

O形环生产方程认为一项成果

as a series of interlocking steps,

是由一系列互相联结的步骤

组成的链。

links in a chain.

Every one of those links must hold for the mission to succeed.

每一处联结都必须牢固 才能保证任务的成功。

If any of them fails,

如果任意一处的联结失败了，

the mission, or the product or the service,

这项任务，或是产品，或是服务

comes crashing down.

都会失败。

This precarious situation has a surprisingly positive implication,

这种危险的情况 有令人惊讶的积极影响，

which is that improvements

因为它可以保证

in the reliability of any one link in the chain

流程上任何一个环节的可靠性

increases the value of improving any of the other links.

对其它环节的价值能够 产生一个促进的作用。

Concretely, if most of the links are brittle and prone to breakage,

具体来说，如果流程中大多数的 联结很脆弱并且易于破裂，

the fact that your link is not that reliable

那么每个环节的可靠与否

is not that important.

就显得不那么重要了。

反正很有可能别的东西也会坏掉。

Probably something else will break anyway.

但当所有环节都变得 很坚固可靠时，

But as all the other links become robust and reliable,

the importance of your link becomes more essential.

每一个环节就都显得很重要。

In the limit, everything depends upon it.

极限状况下，每个细节都与它息息相关。

The reason the O-ring was critical to space shuttle Challenger

O型环对挑战者号很重要的原因，

is because everything else worked perfectly.

是因为其它一切都可以很好地运行。

If the Challenger were kind of the space era equivalent

如果挑战者号可以在空间上等同于

of Microsoft Windows 2000 --

微软Windows 2000——

(Laughter)

（观众笑声）

the reliability of the O-ring wouldn't have mattered

那么O型环的可靠性 就不那么重要了，

because the machine would have crashed.

因为机器也多半会（因为其他原因）坏掉。

(Laughter)

（观众笑声）

Here's the broader point.

这是一个更宽泛的观点。

In much of the work that we do, we are the O-rings.

在我们做的很多工作中 ， 我们就是O型环。

Yes, ATMs could do certain cash-handling tasks

是的，ATM机可以做 一些处理现金的任务，

faster and better than tellers,

而且跟银行柜员比起来更快、更好，

但这并不代表银行柜员就是多余的。

but that didn't make tellers superfluous.

It increased the importance of their problem-solving skills

它提升了他们解决问题的能力，

and their relationships with customers.

以及与顾客的关系。

The same principle applies if we're building a building,

同样的原理也适用于 建造一栋大楼，

if we're diagnosing and caring for a patient,

诊断和照顾一位病人，

or if we are teaching a class

或者是给一教室的高中生

to a roomful of high schoolers.

教一门课。

As our tools improve,

随着我们的工具功能越来越强大，

technology magnifies our leverage

科技放大了我们的影响力，

and increases the importance of our expertise

提高了专业性的重要性，

同时增强了我们的判断力和创造力。

and our judgment and our creativity.

这就引出了第二个原则：

And that brings me to the second principle:

never get enough.

永远不满足于现状。

You may be thinking, OK, O-ring, got it,

你可能在想，不就是O型环么，明白了，

that says the jobs that people do will be important.

就是说人们所做的工作将会很重要，

They can't be done by machines, but they still need to be done.

这些必不可少的工作 无法由机器替代完成。

But that doesn't tell me how many jobs there will need to be.

然而那没有告诉我 我们将会需要多少工作。

If you think about it, isn't it kind of self-evident

如果你仔细想这个问题， 难道不是一种

一旦我们在某些事情上足够高效了，

that once we get sufficiently productive at something,

我们实际上就对工作胜券在握了？

we've basically worked our way out of a job?

In 1900, 40 percent of all US employment

在1900年，40的美国雇员

was on farms.

都在农场里工作。

Today, it's less than two percent.

今天，这个数字小于2。

Why are there so few farmers today?

为什么现在只有这么少的农民？

It's not because we're eating less.

并不是因为我们吃得少了。

(Laughter)

（观众笑声）

A century of productivity growth in farming

一个世纪农产品生产力的提高

means that now, a couple of million farmers

意味着现在几百万的农民

can feed a nation of 320 million.

就足以养活一个3.2亿人口的国家。

That's amazing progress,

这是一个惊人的进步，

but it also means there are only so many O-ring jobs left in farming.

但这也代表只有一部分 O型环工作还在农业中存在着。

So clearly, technology can eliminate jobs.

显而易见，科技可以减少工作机会，

Farming is only one example.

农业只是一个例子。

There are many others like it.

还有很多方面都和农业一样。

But what's true about a single product or service or industry

但是对于一项产品、服务 或者工业正确的策略，

has never been true about the economy as a whole.

在经济整体上，从来都不是正确的。

Many of the industries in which we now work --

很多我们目前所投身的工业——

health and medicine,

比如健康和医药，

finance and insurance,

金融和保险，

electronics and computing --

电子产品和计算机——

were tiny or barely existent a century ago.

在一个世纪前才初露端倪， 或者几乎不存在。

Many of the products that we spend a lot of our money on --

很多我们花巨资购买的产品——

air conditioners, sport utility vehicles,

比如空调，体育用交通工具，

computers and mobile devices --

电脑和移动设备——

were unattainably expensive,

都曾经价格不菲，

or just hadn't been invented a century ago.

或者在一个世纪前还没有问世。

As automation frees our time, increases the scope of what is possible,

随着自动化让我们有更多自己的时间， 让更多的机遇成为可能，

we invent new products, new ideas, new services

我们发明了新产品，新想法，新服务，

that command our attention,

那些都需要我们的注意力，

occupy our time

占用我们的时间，

and spur consumption.

以及刺激我们的消费。

You may think some of these things are frivolous --

你可能觉得有些事情太过浮夸——

比如极限瑜伽，冒险性的旅游，

extreme yoga, adventure tourism,

Pokémon GO --

或者口袋妖怪游戏——

and I might agree with you.

我也许会赞同你的想法。

But people desire these things, and they're willing to work hard for them.

但是人们渴望这些东西， 而且愿意努力工作去得到它们。

The average worker in 2015

2015年的普通工人

wanting to attain the average living standard in 1915

若想要实现1915年 普通工人的生活品质，

could do so by working just 17 weeks a year,

一年仅仅需要工作17周，

one third of the time.

三分之一的时间。

But most people don't choose to do that.

但大部分人并不会这么做。

They are willing to work hard

他们更情愿努力工作

to harvest the technological bounty that is available to them.

去获得科技带给他们的好处。

Material abundance has never eliminated perceived scarcity.

物质的富足从没有 消除人们观念中的稀缺。

In the words of economist Thorstein Veblen,

就像经济学家 Thorstein Veblen说的那样，

invention is the mother of necessity.

创造是需求之母。

Now ...

那么...

So if you accept these two principles,

如果你接受这两个原则，

the O-ring principle and the never-get-enough principle,

O型环原则和永不满足原则，

then you agree with me.

那么你跟我想的一样。

There will be jobs.

工作始终都会存在。

Does that mean there's nothing to worry about?

但那就表示没什么好担心的吗？

Automation, employment, robots and jobs --

自动化，雇员，机器人和工作——

it'll all take care of itself?

一切都会顺其自然地和谐发展吗？

No.

不是的。

That is not my argument.

这并不是我的观点。

Automation creates wealth

自动化会通过提高工作效率

by allowing us to do more work in less time.

带来财富。

There is no economic law

没有哪条经济定律

that says that we will use that wealth well,

说我们可以很好地 利用那一部分财富，

and that is worth worrying about.

而那正是值得担心的东西。

Consider two countries,

想想这两个国家，

Norway and Saudi Arabia.

挪威和沙特阿拉伯。

Both oil-rich nations,

它们都有很多的石油资源，

it's like they have money spurting out of a hole in the ground.

就好像它们的钱是 从地下的洞喷出来的一样。

(Laughter)

（观众笑声）

But they haven't used that wealth equally well to foster human prosperity,

但是两个国家在利用这笔财富 去帮助人类的发展繁荣上，

human prospering.

没有获得相同的效果。

Norway is a thriving democracy.

挪威是个欣欣向荣的民主国家，

By and large, its citizens work and play well together.

总体而言，它的公民工作生活很富足。

It's typically numbered between first and fourth

国家人民的幸福指数排名，基本都在

第一到第四之间徘徊。

in rankings of national happiness.

Saudi Arabia is an absolute monarchy

而沙特阿拉伯却是个 君主专制的国家，

in which many citizens lack a path for personal advancement.

在那里很多公民 都没有一个获得个人晋升的渠道。

It's typically ranked 35th among nations in happiness,

国家人民的幸福指数 全球排名基本上都落在第35名左右，

which is low for such a wealthy nation.

对于这样一个富有的国家 来说排名算得上低了。

Just by way of comparison,

仅仅为了比较，

the US is typically ranked around 12th or 13th.

美国大都排在第 12 到 13 之间。

The difference between these two countries

这两个国家的差别

is not their wealth

不在它们的富有程度，

and it's not their technology.

也不在科技是否发达，

It's their institutions.

而是它们的制度。

Norway has invested to build a society

挪威长期来致力于

建立一个充满机会与 经济流动性的社会。

with opportunity and economic mobility.

Saudi Arabia has raised living standards

虽然沙特阿拉伯的 生活水平已经有提升，

while frustrating many other human strivings.

但公民的很多其它 人性需求仍饱受压抑。

Two countries, both wealthy,

两个国家都很富有，

not equally well off.

但人民的幸福水平却存在明显差距。

And this brings me to the challenge that we face today,

接下来，我要来谈谈 我们目前所面临的挑战，

the challenge that automation poses for us.

自动化给我们所带来的挑战。

The challenge is not that we're running out of work.

这挑战不是因为工作的短缺。

The US has added 14 million jobs

美国自金融海啸以来

since the depths of the Great Recession.

已经增加了1400万个就业机会。

The challenge is that many of those jobs

问题是这些工作中很多

are not good jobs,

都不是好的工作，

and many citizens cannot qualify for the good jobs

然而很多公民无法胜任 那些被创造出来的

that are being created.

好的工作。

Employment growth in the United States and in much of the developed world

美国以及其它 发达国家的就业增长

looks something like a barbell

就像一个杠铃，

with increasing poundage on either end of the bar.

在横杠的两端都在增重。

On the one hand,

一方面，

you have high-education, high-wage jobs

有学历高薪酬高的工作，

like doctors and nurses, programmers and engineers,

比如说医生和护士， 程序员和工程师，

marketing and sales managers.

市场营销经理。

Employment is robust in these jobs, employment growth.

在这些行业中就业率还在持续增长。

Similarly, employment growth is robust in many low-skill,

同样的，低学历低收入的工作 就业率也在增长，

low-education jobs like food service,

比如餐饮服务业，

cleaning, security,

清洁，安保，

home health aids.

家庭健康护理。

Simultaneously, employment is shrinking

与此同时，失业率也在

in many middle-education, middle-wage, middle-class jobs,

许多中等教育，中等收入， 中产阶级中不断下降，

like blue-collar production and operative positions

比如说蓝领工人和运营岗位，

and white-collar clerical and sales positions.

办公室白领和销售岗位。

The reasons behind this contracting middle

中产阶级规模缩小的背后原因

are not mysterious.

并不是什么不解之谜。

Many of those middle-skill jobs

许多这些中等难度的职位

use well-understood rules and procedures

都遵循着简洁明了的规则和制度，

that can increasingly be codified in software

它们可以被编入程序，

and executed by computers.

并交由电脑执行。

The challenge that this phenomenon creates,

这个现象所带来的挑战，

what economists call employment polarization,

也就是经济学家所说的就业两极化，

is that it knocks out rungs in the economic ladder,

就像少了支撑的梯子，

shrinks the size of the middle class

使中产阶级的规模缩小

and threatens to make us a more stratified society.

并加剧社会分层。

On the one hand, a set of highly paid, highly educated professionals

一方面，一群受过高等教育， 收入丰厚的就业者

doing interesting work,

做着有趣的工作，

on the other, a large number of citizens in low-paid jobs

另一方面，一大群收入很低的公民，

whose primary responsibility is to see to the comfort and health of the affluent.

他们的责任是保证 富足所带来的舒适和健康。

That is not my vision of progress,

这并不是我眼中的进步，

and I doubt that it is yours.

可能也不是你们的。

But here is some encouraging news.

但也有一些比较令人振奋的消息。

We have faced equally momentous economic transformations in the past,

我们已经经历了同样 具有重大意义的经济改革，

and we have come through them successfully.

并取得了成功。

In the late 1800s and early 1900s,

在19世纪末20世纪初，

当自动化设备消除了大量人工农业劳动——

when automation was eliminating vast numbers of agricultural jobs --

remember that tractor? --

记得拖拉机吗——

the farm states faced a threat of mass unemployment,

农场面临着失业率的上升

a generation of youth no longer needed on the farm

一代人年轻人 不再需要在农场上工作了，

but not prepared for industry.

但他们并没有为工业化做好准备。

Rising to this challenge,

面对挑战，

they took the radical step

他们迈出了巨大的一步，

of requiring that their entire youth population

要求那一代的青年在学校读书，

remain in school and continue their education

继续他们的教育，

to the ripe old age of 16.

直到16岁达到心智成熟。

This was called the high school movement,

这被叫做高中运动，

and it was a radically expensive thing to do.

其代价不菲。

Not only did they have to invest in the schools,

人们不仅要投资学校，

but those kids couldn't work at their jobs.

孩子们还不能打工。

It also turned out to be one of the best investments

从效果来看，这是20世纪

the US made in the 20th century.

美国人做的最好的投资。

It gave us the most skilled, the most flexible

它带给了我们全世界最有技术，最灵活，

and the most productive workforce in the world.

也最高效的劳动力。

To see how well this worked, imagine taking the labor force of 1899

如果要看这些变革所带来的好处， 我们可以想像把1899年的劳动力

and bringing them into the present.

带到现在。

Despite their strong backs and good characters,

尽管这些人身体强壮，品格也很好，

many of them would lack the basic literacy and numeracy skills

但他们缺乏基本的识字与算数能力，

to do all but the most mundane jobs.

只能做最简单的日常工作。

Many of them would be unemployable.

他们中很多人会失业。

What this example highlights is the primacy of our institutions,

这些例子说明了教育机构的重要性，

most especially our schools,

特别是我们的学校，

in allowing us to reap the harvest

让我们获取了

of our technological prosperity.

科技繁荣所带来的成果。

It's foolish to say there's nothing to worry about.

说不用担心，难免有些夜郎自大。

Clearly we can get this wrong.

我们千万别误会了。

If the US had not invested in its schools and in its skills

如果美国政府在一世纪前的 高中教育改革运动中

a century ago with the high school movement,

没有投资学校和技术，

we would be a less prosperous,

生活可能就不会这么富足和便利，

a less mobile and probably a lot less happy society.

社会的幸福感可能也会大大地减少。

But it's equally foolish to say that our fates are sealed.

但说这一切都是命中注定， 也是同样并不明智。

That's not decided by the machines.

我们的命运并不是由机械决定，

It's not even decided by the market.

甚至不是由市场决定。

这取决于我们自己以及我们的机构。

It's decided by us and by our institutions.

Now, I started this talk with a paradox.

现在，我想谈谈一个矛盾的现象。

Our machines increasingly do our work for us.

机械不断地取代我们的工作。

Why doesn't that make our labor superfluous,

为什么我们的劳工没有过剩，

our skills redundant?

技术没有被淘汰掉？

Isn't it obvious that the road to our economic and social hell

我们伟大的发明将我们的 经济与社会推入了地狱之门，

is paved with our own great inventions?

这一点不是很明显吗？

History has repeatedly offered an answer to that paradox.

历史已经不止一次地为 这一矛盾的现象提供了答案。

The first part of the answer is that technology magnifies our leverage,

答案的第一个部分就是： 科技放大了我们存在的功能性，

increases the importance, the added value

增进了我们的重要性和价值，

of our expertise, our judgment and our creativity.

使我们的专业判断与创造力得到提升。

That's the O-ring.

这是O型环原则。

The second part of the answer is our endless inventiveness

答案的第二部分就是： 我们永无止境的发明

and bottomless desires

以及无穷的欲望，

means that we never get enough, never get enough.

意味着我们永远不知足，

There's always new work to do.

总是把精力投入到新鲜事物中。

Adjusting to the rapid pace of technological change

适应快速的科技变化

creates real challenges,

创造出了真实的挑战，

seen most clearly in our polarized labor market

最明显的就是， 我们劳动市场的两极化，

and the threat that it poses to economic mobility.

以及它为经济活跃度 所带来的威胁。

Rising to this challenge is not automatic.

迎接这一挑战并不是自然而然的，

It's not costless.

它并非没有代价，

It's not easy.

也不是轻而易举，

But it is feasible.

但是是可行的。

And here is some encouraging news.

这里有一些好消息。

Because of our amazing productivity,

得益于惊人的生产力，

we're rich.

我们变得富有了，

Of course we can afford to invest in ourselves and in our children

我们当然可以负担起 投资我们自己和孩子，

as America did a hundred years ago with the high school movement.

就像美国一百年前的 高中教育改革运动一样。

Arguably, we can't afford not to.

甚至可以说，我们无法承担不这么做的后果。

Now, you may be thinking,

你可能在想，

Professor Autor has told us a heartwarming tale

奥图教授已经告诉了我们一个

about the distant past,

有关于久远的历史，

the recent past,

近代历史，

maybe the present, but probably not the future.

也许是当代的温暖的童话， 但可能并没有涉及到未来。

Because everybody knows that this time is different.

因为大家都知道， 这次的情况是不一样的。

Right? Is this time different?

对吧？这次会不一样吗？

Of course this time is different.

当然不一样。

Every time is different.

每次都不一样。

On numerous occasions in the last 200 years,

在过去200年的无数场合中，

scholars and activists have raised the alarm

学者与社会运动者不断地警告我们

that we are running out of work and making ourselves obsolete:

工作要消失了， 我们会被自己淘汰掉，

for example, the Luddites in the early 1800s;

例如，19世纪初的卢德份子 （英国参与捣毁机器的人）；

US Secretary of Labor James Davis

20世纪20年代的美国劳工部长

in the mid-1920s;

詹姆士 · 戴维斯；

Nobel Prize-winning economist Wassily Leontief in 1982;

1982年诺贝尔经济学家 瓦西里 · 列昂季耶夫；

当然，还有很多学者、

and of course, many scholars,

pundits, technologists

评论员、科技家，

and media figures today.

还有今日的媒体明星。

These predictions strike me as arrogant.

这些人的预测在我看来似乎都很狂妄。

These self-proclaimed oracles are in effect saying,

这些自称圣贤的人像是在告诉我们，

"If I can't think of what people will do for work in the future,

“ 如果我都想像不到 人们未来可以做什么工作，

then you, me and our kids

那么你，我和我们的小孩

aren't going to think of it either."

也都不会想像得到。”

I don't have the guts

我没有胆量在公众面前

to take that bet against human ingenuity.

质疑人类的聪明才智。

Look, I can't tell you what people are going to do for work

听着，我无法告诉你一百年后

a hundred years from now.

人类会从事什么工作。

But the future doesn't hinge on my imagination.

因为未来不是我说了算。

If I were a farmer in Iowa in the year 1900,

如果我是1900年爱荷华州的一位农夫，

and an economist from the 21st century teleported down to my field

有一位21世纪的经济学家 瞬间移动来到我的农场，

and said, "Hey, guess what, farmer Autor,

跟我说，“嘿，奥图农夫，你知道吗？

in the next hundred years,

接下来的几百年，

agricultural employment is going to fall from 40 percent of all jobs

农业的从业人员将从40

to two percent

减少到2，

purely due to rising productivity.

只因为生产力提升了。

What do you think the other 38 percent of workers are going to do?"

你觉得剩下38的人 将来会做什么工作？ ”

I would not have said, "Oh, we got this.

我不可能会说，“哦，我们早就知道了，

We'll do app development, radiological medicine,

我们会开发应用软件，放射性药物，

yoga instruction, Bitmoji."

瑜珈课程、手机表情符号软件。”

(Laughter)

（观众笑声）

I wouldn't have had a clue.

我根本不会知道的。

But I hope I would have had the wisdom to say,

但我希望我可以明智地说出，

"Wow, a 95 percent reduction in farm employment

“哇，农场工人减少了95，

with no shortage of food.

却没有造成食物短缺，

That's an amazing amount of progress.

真的是一大进步啊！

I hope that humanity finds something remarkable to do

我希望人类繁荣后

能找到更有意义的事来做。”

with all of that prosperity."

And by and large, I would say that it has.

总体来讲，我觉得我们已经在做了。

Thank you very much.

非常感谢。

(Applause)

（观众掌声）